California Court of Appeal

In suit alleging accounting malpractice, brought less than two years after the IRS withdrew its proposed tax deficiency assessment, judgment holding that the action was barred by the applicable statute of limitations is reversed where, since the audit process formally concluded when an agreement settling the issues in the audit with no tax deficiency was executed by plaintiffs and the IRS in August 2002, less than two years prior to the initiation of this action, the statute of limitations had not run.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/25/2007
• Published 09/25/2007

Judges

• DUFFY, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Donald J. Putterman,Constance J. Yu, Sideman & Bancroft, San Francisco, Jon B. Eisenberg, Eisenberg & Hancock, Oakland, for Plaintiffs and Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Arthur V. Pearson, Joan E. Low, Murphy, Pearson, Bradley & Feeney, San Francisco, Daniel U. Smith, Law Offices of Daniel U. Smith, Kentfield, for Defendants and Respondents.